On 1. 2. 2016 at 09:59:23, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 09:44:29AM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote: > > On 29. 1. 2016 at 22:03:00, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > FWIW I found the new database backend (not mentioned anywhere in the > > > > > > original submission). It is here: > > > http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=rpm.git;a=tree;f=lib/backend/ndb > > > > > > Since this change has (rashly) been approved by FESCO, I guess we're > > > going to be copying this code into some libguestfs tools, and we'll > > > have to keep up with changes to RPM. It's a drag compared to using a > > > real key-value store. > > > > May I ask why? Accessing rpm database in a different way than through > > librpm API is highly discouraged even now. > > It's discussed in this thread already. Please see: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/ > message/QZG6BVLOOYYGLFJQK5RQ5LAPJIL2KMYF/ > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > /message/NYEVENDEUVPRMWD7PJM2IJSR54H25SKI/ > > Even if the RPM database is only accessed via librpm, it's still > important that the most central database present on every Fedora > system is reliable, well-tested and flexible. Sqlite is a highly > regarded piece of software, which runs on billions of Android phones.
Fair enough but that doesn't answer my question. What is the reason for copying rpm code in libguestfs instead of using librpm? Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
